Monday, March 2, 2009

After the turmoil of the 1970s things finally seem to settle down in WCG. Although Meredith had some private disagreements with HWA, such as makeup, for instance, he was willing to follow HWA's lead. All seemed well. Any internal threat had been removed. Only loyal minions remain. In this setting this narrative now continues.

By 1981 after years of turmoil stability returned to WCG. Anyone bold enough to publicly disagree with HWA's autocracy have been kicked out or learned to be quiet. Although even Meredith had to spend several months in exile in Hawaii he came through still pretty much in the good graces of the (alleged) Apostle Herbert W. Armstrong. This narrative now continues.

1981: Before we continue I would like to revisit the makeup ban revival. In AR18 December 1981 it was revealed that Meredith opposed the makeup ban revival. He tried to get Tkach on his side but failed. So it would appear that Meredith knew that this was wrong, but still he did not leave WCG. He knew his church would now once again inflict untold harm upon women in vain, but he did not leave. He went along with it, knowing it was wrong. He chose to go along with this abuse against women rather than defending the truth. This reminds me of this fascinating account of when Gerald Flurry allowed a popular minister to teach for three years even though the minister disagreed with their so-called 'little book' Malachi's Message, and later Ron Fraser came to see that Malachi's Message did indeed have flaws in it but chose to be loyal to 'that prophet' Flurry instead of the truth. These men have acted in the same way. And now we continue.

1982: 'According to Joseph Hopkins, writing in the August 6 issue of Christianity Today, the men on HWA's council of elders each receive yearly salaries of between $60,000 and $100,000 per year. That figure is exclusive of numerous special financial benefits they also receive.' (AR21 September 1982).

However despite his return from exile it appears that HWA did not trust him as much as before. 'Evangelist Roderick Meredith, often named as a likely successor to Herbert Armstrong, appears to have again fallen out of favor with the head of his church. Friends say Armstrong has become aware of Meredith's recent disenchantment with his worldly life-style and personal morals. Not surprisingly, HWA has not granted Meredith the position of authority some church members feel he deserves.' In response he gave more positions over to Ellis LaRavia (AR21 September 1982).

1984: Roderick Meredith testifies in Leona McNair trial. His side lost and WCG was ordered by the jury to pay her $1.26 million. Even at the end of the trial he did not show any remose for his actions but insead tried to blame the situation on others (AR29 October 1984).

The article about this trial, in my opinion, is essential reading to understand what sort of man Roderick Meredith is. Knowledge cannot harm the truth. If you think he is a man worthy of your respect then you must read this article. Alas many true believers will just ignore what that article has to say carelessly assuming that Satan is behind it. Such Armstrongites are afraid of the truth. If such persons really did possess the love of the Truth why are they afraid of the truth when it shows Roderick Meredith in a bad light? (AR29 October 1984).

It was also reported that a daughter of Leona and Raymond McNair, 'when asked about [Meredith's testimony that the McNairs and Meredith had a 'close friendship' together], said she didn't believe true friendship ever really existed between Meredith and her father. She described their relationship as one that would quickly evaporate were it perceived as getting in the way of "the Work."' (AR29 October 1984). Considering what would happen later when the two parted ways during the GCG-LCG split in 1998, their reconciliation and resplit, this assertion would seem to be justified.

WCG appealed and the case would drag on until 1993 when WCG paid Leona McNair $750,000 in an out of court settlement in 1993.

Walter Martin in the 1984 edition of The Kingdom of the Cults cites Meredith who in his booklet The Inside Story of the World Tomorrow (pp. 47-8) insists HWA did not burrow ideas from Jehovah Witnesses, Seventh-day Adventists, Mormons etc . However Martin soon proves that actually HWA is guilty of plagiarism. I, for one, after reading the relevant sections on Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormonism was amazed over how similar their doctrines are.

1985: January 19: In a sermon Meredith 'attacked mental health professionals, saying that such counselors liked to "play God."' This caused AR editor John Trechak to write a letter to him as these comments seem to have been made in response to widespread mental problems within WCG (AR32 June 1985).

While assessing Meredith's chances for becoming successor AR wrote the following: 'Roderick Meredith, although ambitious, has little support on the WCG board. His years of harsh rule over the WCG ministry have left him with few important supporters for any major power role. Thus his name can be eliminated.' (AR31 March 1985).

1986: HWA rejects Meredith and chooses Joseph W. Tkach as successor. 'Privately, [HWA] also told several leaders that Rod Meredith should never be in that position [leadership]. (Tkach. Jr., Tansformed by Truth, Chapter 6)'This assertion is also supported by Aaron Dean (UCG), a close aid to HWA at the time, as recorded by Stephen Flurry (PCG). He states that HWA said to him that Meredith must never become leader of the church, and he also says this is why HWA appointed Tkach lest Meredith should take over (Stephen Flurry, Raising the Ruins, Chapter 3). Some of my thoughts on that book may be seen elsewhere. (By the way, the book says that Dean was saying all this in a 'telephone interview', if I understand correctly. Was this before or after the No Contact rule?) Even if we assume that Tkach, Dean and Flurry are just tryimng to discredit him, it cannot be denied that HWA did not choose Meredith. AR42 September 1989 also discusses the succession but Mr. Trechak here seems unaware of HWA's fear of Meredith. AR52 June 1993 also states the following: 'In fact, before HWA had even died, Meredith privately made statements to the effect that he, and not Tkach, should be Armstrong's successor.'

Meredith is then moved to teach at Big Sandy by Headquarters (AR36 August 1986).

1990: Meredith is moved from his teaching position at Big Sandy to Pasadena in internal exile. According to his own account he becomes suspicious of Headquarters' motives and hears rumors of an immanent sacking. Near the end of the year Bernie Schnippert and Michael Feazell try to persuade him to go along with the changes. He refuses (In Transition, Issue 7 October 1995).

1991: WCG orders that Meredith 'is no longer allowed to preach or write articles for church publications.'(AR46 January 1991).

1992: WCG tried to retire some hard Armstrongite preachers such as Gerald Waterhouse and than Meredith. For awhile he was forbidden to preach from the pulpit, but in October he was allowed to give the closing prayer before a Feast of Tabernacles gathering at Palm Springs. He took a remarkable long time in his prayer. After that he was asked to retire. Meredith than had a two hour meeting with Tkach, Sr. After that he was fired and disfollowshiped. Than an anonymous letter emerged signed 'Friends from Pasadena' emerged comdemning the Changes. Some hoped this would be the start of an internal revolt. It did not happen. Even Herman Hoeh continued to remain loyal to Tkach, Sr. Meredith than announced the formation of his own church, the Global Church of God (GCG).

In asserting his legitimacy Meredith emphasized 'how he was one of the first evangelists ordained by HWA and how he knew the Armstrong family personally and intimately. He even assisted HWA in attempting to resurrect Richard Armstrong after his fatal car crash in 1958, and he was one of the few at Loma Armstrong's death bed. Using Waterhouse-like "reasoning," he points out that GCG was born 40 years after he was ordained and that at GCG's very first service there were 19 people in attendance - exactly the same number as at HWA's first service decades ago.' Some in WCG responded by saying that 'there were seven years between the WCG financial crisis of 1965 and the church crisis of 1972 when Garner Ted Armstrong was put out of the WCG [and major WCG prophecies failed]. There were then seven years until the start of the famous State of California versus WCG lawsuit in 1979, another seven years until the death of HWA in 1986, and, finally, another seven years until Meredith's great rebellion of 1993. The theory WCG numerologists are apparently promoting is that God allows Satan to attack the WCG in some major way every seven years. Meredith therefore is supposed to represent but one more Satanic attack the WCG will weather on its way to "the end."' And so the Global Church of God is born (AR52 June 1993). Articles of Incorporation are made.

And so despite all the great struggle to eliminate all dissent in WCG over the years, in which Meredith took a leading part, it all turned out to be in vain. So we see how impossible it is to fully control other people. So now Meredith must start from scratch all over again.

13 comments:

Redfox, in my last comment I suggested that you would do well to enroll in a course of basic English. Three sentences from just a single paragraph of your latest effort prove my point.

"Than an anonymous letter emerged signed 'Friends from Pasadena' emerged comdemning the Changes."

"Meredith than had a two hour meeting with Tkach, Sr."

"Even Herman Hoeh continued to remain loyal to Tkach, Sr. Meredith than announced the formation of his own church, the Global Church of God (GCG)."

The word you are groping for is "then". Than is a completely different word. The change of single letter can change the entire meaning of a word.

I have another helpful point. It is true that the prefixes con... and com... can have the same meaning of "with". But they are not necessarily interchangeable. The word "condemning" cannot be written as comdemning. Since you like to do much condemning I think it would be good to have it's correct spelling in your repertoire.

To give you some practice at proof-reading your own writing I have made at least one intentional mistake in what I have written. I invite you to find my error.

Redfox, time to face facts and close this blog down.- you are no writer. There is no finesse or wit or grace in your style. - you don't know your subject. You have never even been to an LCG service in spite of being "enamoured" (your word) for years. Forcing your family off unclean meats doesn't make you an expert.- you have no credibility because you are easily seen to be a liar. Reference your false statement that LCG wants one-third of a person's money.- for all your work practically no-one is paying attention. Just two followers. That's because this is a pointless, boring blog. It's poorly written nonsense by a person with no originality, who has no talent and nothing better to do than copy what has already been written by others.- RIP livingarmstronism blog. It died as it was born, a hate-filled failure.

Painful Truth,You defend Redfox without reading what he actually wrote. He did not pass through the doors. He admits he never attended a service. All he did was stop his family eating pork.

And you, too, are a liar when you say that one-third of a person's money is wanted. You know that is a lie and pathetically playing with numbers does not fool most even if it satisfies you.

And your first paragraph, uhmm, what is that proverb about the pot calling the kettle black? I invite anyone to follow Painful Truth's posts and discern the spirit. And YOU complain of insults - hilarious!

Well I am not worried about grammar here, but do want to thank you Redfox712 for your very thorough workup on the Armstrong wannabes of Meredith's ministerial minions. I am sooo grateful that some may see this and benefit from its thorough look into the past history of Armstrongism. I do hope all the Armstrong minions will read it and get off our backs. Thanks much!

No, Painful Lie, I am telling the truth and one does not have to give a third every three years. If there is by any chance anyone here who would like to know that actual true biblical practice of LCG on the matter of tithing I can give it to them. Email me priam700bc@gmail.com

As far as I understand it first tithe and third tithe are paid directly to the church. Although second tithe is not paid directly to the church it is still money which those drawn into Armstrongism have lost control of. The tither must spend that money in a manner directed by the church, mainly in order to finance their attendance at the Feast of Tabernacles. As far as I understand it the tither cannot spend that money on other essentials, like paying the mortgage, getting medicine, etc. Although the tither does not pay second tithe directly to the church he or she must spend it in a manner directed by the church, he or she cannot keep it for him or herself. Although the tither does not give the church a third of his or her money every third and fourth year the tither has given up control of that money in order fulfill the dictates of the church. LCG, and all other such churches, have no right to place such a burden on their followers.

Looking back my previous comment was lacking in clarity. I will now change how I express the fact of the three tithes. None of this change the sad fact that LCG expects their members, most of whom are not that well off financially, to spend 30% of their hard earned money in a manner which the church dictates. I believe that God is not working through LCG (why may be seen elsewhere on this blog) and therefore no one is obligated to hand over any money to them, in fact they should not be given any money at all.

May all those who now believe what HWA taught wake up and be free of Armstrongism and embrace the Lord without HWA's teachings. May the Lord help them on their exodus.

I would like to add to your comments what I have checked and found to be the facts pertaining to tithes as best I can express them.- first tithe is not required on unearned income. This means that anyone on a government pension or on welfare does not have to pay any tithe. It is not required on gifts or bequests.- Second tithe is spent on oneself mainly at the Feast of Tabernacles and other feasts. This is used to buy gifts for family and friends also. (You will find that the average western household spends this sort of sum on Christmas and birthdays. Check the stats.)- From the second tithe, those who can afford to, contribute 10% ie 1% of income for administration of the Feast and excess may be contributed to those who do need assistance to attend the Feast.- two years in seven (not one year in three) those who can afford to pay third tithe to assist those in need. This is not required from the needy rather it is for the needy.

If you carefully do your sums you will find that on a per annum basis some LCG members will be contributing to the church 0% in actual tithes. The employed and well off may be contributing 14% in tithes to the church. This is a far cry from the "one third of your money" false claim.

Painful Liar,we now know that you did not have a decent classical education.

Having grown up in WCG, I am familiar with the doctrines and practices. Now, almost 50 years old, I am still grieved by my and my family's experiences within that "church" [church of satan, but not of God]. It took me years of reading the Bible to become deprogrammed from all of the twisted things I grew up hearing/learning.

If You are new please read this

Hand in Hand for Syria

Keep Somalia's Remittances Open

I encourage readers to sign this petition from Oxfam calling upon the U.S. government to let the Somali diaspora continue to send remittance to their loved ones in Somalia.

Moves have been made to shut down such remittances from Somalis in America. Many Somalis need these remittances. The remittances to Somalia are larger than foreign aid contributions and are a lifeline to these people caught in trouble and turmoil.

It is true that HWA said that some Eastern European states would break away from Moscow's orbit and join the European Empire he said would arise at any moment. But he never talked of the Soviet Union collapsing. He did not teach that. Also he portrayed the rise of the European Empire to be far quicker then what has actually happened. In Mystery of the Ages Christ was supposed to return by 2005 at the most.

So assertions that the fall of the Berlin Wall somehow prove that HWA was right is just complete nonsense spread by people who, for whatever reason, are still in denial that HWA was a false prophet who merely talked out of his own "human reasoning".

Truth about Roderick C. Meredith

What sort of man is he? A man who could say things like this.

"Mr. Armstrong has reminded us again that we are to disfellowship any members who attend GTA's [Garner Ted Armstrong's] campaigns, church services or other meetings. Some of our weaker members apparently do not realize that this man is in direct rebellion against God and His government! We must not allow them, or ourselves, to rationalize about this matter, to try to "help the underdog," or in any other way lend support to one whose gross immorality, whose long standing "play acting" and hypocrisy, and whose direct insubordination to the Government of God has long been and is now a source of confusion and DIVISION among God's people. So, as per Mr. Armstrong's instruction, I charge and exhort every one of you faithful ministers of the living Christ to explain this in no uncertain terms to your members, to warn them about this cause of division and then to disfellowship any who consort with GTA or any of his fellows." (Roderick C. Meredith, Pastor's Report, May 21, 1979, pp. 1-2.)

David Robinson on Roderick C. Meredith

"During the ten years I have been an employee of the Worldwide Church, you have been poorly spoken of by most of the ministers and employees I have known. I vividly remember the absolute unbounded glee that was openly expressed by a good number of respected men in the church when you were first "shanghaied." [In 1972.] I could begin by naming names, which I am sure would shock you. I was one of the few who stood, where possible, for you. Your tenure as superintendent of ministers, as I believe the office was then called, was looked on as nightmarish. While you held office during the years of growth, most of those whom I know gave you very little credit for that growth. Almost everyone whom I know, whether they be former friends of yours, or continuing foes, recalls insensitive and terrible things you have done. Without exception, at least among my acquaintances, they all credit you with an unbridled lust for power and list you as one who is willing to pay the price of gaining that power, no matter what. I have, through many of the last few years, believed you had principles you would not violate. Many a man of experience in the church assured me of my error. Events have proven me wrong and them right. Mr. Armstrong has himself been widely quoted as saying of you that you were so righteous that you were so "righteous you were unrighteous." " (David Robinson, Herbert Armstrong's Tangled Web, Chapter 16, p. 207.)

Of course it is impossible for me to personally verify these assertions but people deserve to know what this knowledgeable man had to say about him.